Is a grooved collar implant design superior to a machined design regarding bone level alteration? An observational pilot study

Quintessence Int. 2014 Mar;45(3):221-9. doi: 10.3290/j.qi.a31208.

Abstract

Objective: This retrospective observational pilot study examined differences in peri-implant bone level changes (ΔIBL) between two similar implant types differing only in the surface texture of the neck. The hypothesis tested was that ΔIBL would be greater with machined-neck implants than with groovedneck implants.

Method and materials: 40 patients were enrolled; n = 20 implants with machined (group 1) and n = 20 implants with a rough, grooved neck (group 2), all placed in the posterior mandible. Radiographs were obtained after loading (at 3 to 9 months) and at 12 to 18 months after implant insertion. Case number calculation with respect to ΔIBL was conducted. Groups were compared using a Brunner-Langer model, the Mann-Whitney test, the Wilcoxon signed rank test, and linear model analysis.

Results: After the 12- to 18-month observation period, mean ΔIBL was -1.11 ± 0.92 mm in group 1 and -1.25 ± 1.23 mm in group 2. ΔIBL depended significantly on time (P < .001), but not on group. In both groups, mean marginal ΔIBL was significantly less than -1.5 mm. Only insertion depth had a significant influence on the amount of periimplant bone loss (P = .013). Case number estimate testing for a difference between group 1 and 2 with a power of 90% revealed a sample size per group of 1,032 subjects.

Conclusion: ΔIBL values indicated that both implant designs fulfilled implant success criteria, and the modification of implant neck texture had no significant influence on ΔIBL.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Observational Study

MeSH terms

  • Alveolar Bone Loss / diagnostic imaging*
  • Dental Implants*
  • Dental Prosthesis Design*
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Mandible
  • Pilot Projects
  • Radiography
  • Retrospective Studies
  • Surface Properties

Substances

  • Dental Implants